mac5155 wrote:I don't know how exactly it works, but its something like that but increases as time goes on. I could afford the standard payment so I didn't worry about it, essentially you are paying less in the beginning but ended up paying almost double the interest. Some quick reading, it may actually be somewhat beneficial...

The Federal government's income contingent repayment formula compares two payment ceilings, picking the lower ceiling as your monthly payment. The first ceiling is 20% of your monthly discretionary income. Discretionary income is defined to be the adjusted gross income minus the federal poverty line that corresponds to your family size and the state in which you reside. The second ceiling is the amount of the 12-year standard repayment plan monthly payment, multiplied by an income percentage factor (IPF). The IPF corresponds to your income and marital status, and starts at about 50% for incomes near the poverty line. There is also a $5 minimum monthly payment. (Technically, if your monthly payment is $0 it is not rounded up to $5, but a monthly payment of $0.01 would be rounded up to $5.)

That's for Income Contingent. There's also Income Based, which is a bit different, and sounds like it's for people who can't find any job. Income Contingent sounds like its for those who have a job but have high debts (which is what category I would fall into). I'd like to ask an accountant to crunch the numbers for me just to see. I think my repayment plans right now are 15 years so 25 is intimidating, but if the gov't is willing to pay some of my interest, then have at it.

I just applied for the IBR or Income Based plan. It ends up linking to the IRS web page and pulls in your AGI. The amount you pay is 15% of you AGI divided by 12. I did a little research and all my loans are at 25 years right now, and with the IBR plan I would pay about $130 less a month based on my current salary. You then pay taxes on any amount left at the end of 25 years.

Check my most recent edit to my previous post. I wonder if its something I should look into?

Once my wedding is done and paid for, I was planning on putting the $1k a month thats going into our savings acct for it onto my student loans, and hopefully have them paid off in 5 years. I wonder if I should just get on the IBR payment plan? It will probably end up screwing me once I'm married though, my AGI will skyrocket.

Some of the new claims, especially in New Jersey, were due to Hurricane Sandy--but these were offset by a decline in claims filed in New York. The highest numbers of new filings came from Pennsylvania and Ohio, where there were thousands of layoffs in the construction, manufacturing, and automobile industries.

Both states had been targeted by the presidential campaigns. President Obama highlighted his record of job creation in Ohio in particular, focusing on the automobile industry. The state reported 6,450 new jobless claims in the week after the election--second-highest after Pennsylvania, which recorded 7,766 new claims.

Some of the new claims, especially in New Jersey, were due to Hurricane Sandy--but these were offset by a decline in claims filed in New York. The highest numbers of new filings came from Pennsylvania and Ohio, where there were thousands of layoffs in the construction, manufacturing, and automobile industries.

Both states had been targeted by the presidential campaigns. President Obama highlighted his record of job creation in Ohio in particular, focusing on the automobile industry. The state reported 6,450 new jobless claims in the week after the election--second-highest after Pennsylvania, which recorded 7,766 new claims.

Some of the new claims, especially in New Jersey, were due to Hurricane Sandy--but these were offset by a decline in claims filed in New York. The highest numbers of new filings came from Pennsylvania and Ohio, where there were thousands of layoffs in the construction, manufacturing, and automobile industries.

Both states had been targeted by the presidential campaigns. President Obama highlighted his record of job creation in Ohio in particular, focusing on the automobile industry. The state reported 6,450 new jobless claims in the week after the election--second-highest after Pennsylvania, which recorded 7,766 new claims.

haha, and who won Ohio and PA? good job, voters!

Hah, look at that, OH and PA elected Obama then all got fired. I'm sure they deserved it. ( I wonder how many of those people were campaign employees that are now temporarily out of work?)

I personally wasn't trying to tie it into the election, just noting which states were hit the worst (PA especially). The first week and a half of post-election economic news hasn't exactly been good, though.

Some of the new claims, especially in New Jersey, were due to Hurricane Sandy--but these were offset by a decline in claims filed in New York. The highest numbers of new filings came from Pennsylvania and Ohio, where there were thousands of layoffs in the construction, manufacturing, and automobile industries.

Both states had been targeted by the presidential campaigns. President Obama highlighted his record of job creation in Ohio in particular, focusing on the automobile industry. The state reported 6,450 new jobless claims in the week after the election--second-highest after Pennsylvania, which recorded 7,766 new claims.

haha, and who won Ohio and PA? good job, voters!

Hah, look at that, OH and PA elected Obama then all got fired. I'm sure they deserved it. ( I wonder how many of those people were campaign employees that are now temporarily out of work?)

Troy Loney wrote:No, he's basically attacking pizza papa john for being a public jerk*** about the election threatning to fire people and increase the price of pizzas.

Yeah, he shouldn't be publicly talking like that, but I don't have an issue with companies doing this to legitimately compensate for financial changes.

Godbless these corporate freedom fighters in their attempt to save capitalism from a $0.15/pizza tax. Move over Boston Tea Party...

Did I miss something? What the hell is the deal with the unlimited amount of snark in this thread lately? It was pretty awful leading up to this election, but it's about intolerable at this point.

Say a corporation decides to lay off a certain percentage of their workforce and cut back on benefits because of changes that are going to affect their company due to the ACA (or any other government regulation for that matter). People like you think they are being greedy, and that they should suck it up and take less of a profit. I'm not talking about Papa John's in this instance, but this is a scenario that is likely going to play out across the country, for legitimate reasons.

^^^^ Exactly what I'm talking about. Over the last few months the PDT has turned from a discussion thread into a circlejerk of who can come up with the snarkiest, wittiest, and most sarcastic one-liner. Knock yourselves out.

Troy Loney wrote:No, he's basically attacking pizza papa john for being a public jerk*** about the election threatning to fire people and increase the price of pizzas.

Yeah, he shouldn't be publicly talking like that, but I don't have an issue with companies doing this to legitimately compensate for financial changes.

Godbless these corporate freedom fighters in their attempt to save capitalism from a $0.15/pizza tax. Move over Boston Tea Party...

Did I miss something? What the hell is the deal with the unlimited amount of snark in this thread lately? It was pretty awful leading up to this election, but it's about intolerable at this point.

Say a corporation decides to lay off a certain percentage of their workforce and cut back on benefits because of changes that are going to affect their company due to the ACA (or any other government regulation for that matter). People like you think they are being greedy, and that they should suck it up and take less of a profit. I'm not talking about Papa John's in this instance, but this is a scenario that is likely going to play out across the country, for legitimate reasons.

You are right, I've been substituting a lot of snarkiness in for cynicism lately. I'll try to tone it down. You might want to acknowledge your own rap sheet in this area before proceeding though.

As for your 2nd point, we just have fundamental differences of opinion on worker's rights, healthcare, greed, certain wrestlers, etc. Can't these owners pull up their boot straps a little? {last one, I swear}

I talked to a relative who's a franchisee of a major fast food company with multiple locations and he told me that the ACA is going to alter their business, but he hasn't figured out what to do, and since he's tied into corporate for a lot of what he does the cost has a significant affect on his bottom line. He's not sure whether he CAN pass an increase on to the customer. He has to look at his agreement, and he doesn't want to reduce hours and hire more employees to offset the cuts. He even jokingly said he might have to visit the world of the undocumented worker.......

Troy Loney wrote:No, he's basically attacking pizza papa john for being a public jerk*** about the election threatning to fire people and increase the price of pizzas.

Yeah, he shouldn't be publicly talking like that, but I don't have an issue with companies doing this to legitimately compensate for financial changes.

Godbless these corporate freedom fighters in their attempt to save capitalism from a $0.15/pizza tax. Move over Boston Tea Party...

Did I miss something? What the hell is the deal with the unlimited amount of snark in this thread lately? It was pretty awful leading up to this election, but it's about intolerable at this point.

Say a corporation decides to lay off a certain percentage of their workforce and cut back on benefits because of changes that are going to affect their company due to the ACA (or any other government regulation for that matter). People like you think they are being greedy, and that they should suck it up and take less of a profit. I'm not talking about Papa John's in this instance, but this is a scenario that is likely going to play out across the country, for legitimate reasons.

You are right, I've been substituting a lot of snarkiness in for cynicism lately. I'll try to tone it dKown. You might want to acknowledge your own rap sheet in this area before proceeding though.

As for your 2nd point, we just have fundamental differences of opinion on worker's rights, healthcare, greed, certain wrestlers, etc. Can't these owners pull up their boot straps a little? {last one, I swear}

CEOs like Papa Johns need to understand the backlash and to tone it down.

However, the public needs to understand their cost increases or the now forced changes in their workforce.Multi franchise owners have hundreds or thousands of employees. Most part time. They either have to raise prices, manage larger number of employees each working less hours, and/or pay large fines.

If someone agrees with the ACA, that is your opinion but idiots like John Stewart spouting factless rhetoric as if this CEO is making this all up or it's not a big issue in general is a huge part of the problem.

Yes it's pizza, yes pizza is unimportant, yes it's sounds silly. But it's a huge business that employees a lot of folks, and is owned on the franchise level by many different owners. A lot of moving parts a lot of lives affected.

Pizza Papa John and Mr Denny's don't need to make these public statements, it's not like this legislation isn't impacting their competition in the exact same way. Pizza Hut and Crapplebee's also have to deal with this and hike up their prices.